Animal experimentation is often justified by the claim that, despite its shortcomings, it is our only alternative for improving human treatment. This viewpoint ignores how a species’ physical distinctions can produce false information.
Over 50 million animals are reportedly utilized in laboratory studies each year in the United States, according to the Humane Society. The Animal Welfare Act only provides inadequate protection for some species, there are many violations, and most tested animals are not protected.
Animals are kept in sterile cages and subjected to hazardous chemicals or diseases during these trials. After experiments are over, they are typically put to death.
Despite these bleak facts, promoters of animal testing contend that it is essential for advancements in and therapies for human illness. Supporters of animal testing cite significant historical breakthroughs that used animal research to support their argument.
A closer examination of these assertions reveals that they may not be as true as they seem and that animal testing may perhaps be impeding medical advancement.
Animal experimentation is often justified by the claim that, despite its shortcomings, it is our only alternative for improving human treatment. This viewpoint ignores the possibility that variances in species’ bodies could produce inaccurate information, which might even be worse than no knowledge.
